The river’s contract: An opportunity for new landscape planning activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The River's Contract is a new tool based on the voluntary agreement between local authorities and private people as a form of negotiated and shared planning procedure.It can be an opportunity to achieve landscape quality aims established by the National Code for the Cultural and Landscape Heritage.The River's Contract does embrace protection of main beliefs, 'both because its natural and environmental meanings, both as the artificial landscape, created by people'.This type of approach may be even more significant in the context of inland areas, as areas subject to strong centrifugal forces, with demographic problems and unbalanced development.The 'internal areas', as known characterized by lack of services in the small urban settlement, can promote polycentric solutions aimed at improving the production quality of the sites.As part of the optimization of the relationship between a city and country they can accommodate development models linked to valorization of their natural and cultural heritage, finalized to the maintenance of its territorial identity.This paper aims to investigate the energy potentialities of river flows, in particular regarding the possibility of the hydro-electric plants, that are either unused or underused.They are elements of interest from the point of view of the local technological tradition.Moreover, they can be used following a project in order to create local energy centres, identified through the study of programming wishes expressed by the local authorities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".